138 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28271550)
1. The reproducibility and clinical utility of the 3D camera for measuring scar height, with a protocol for administration.
Tyack Z; Simons M; Kimble RM; Muller MJ; Leung K
Skin Res Technol; 2017 Nov; 23(4):463-470. PubMed ID: 28271550
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Ultrasound is a reproducible and valid tool for measuring scar height in children with burn scars: A cross-sectional study of the psychometric properties and utility of the ultrasound and 3D camera.
Simons M; Kee EG; Kimble R; Tyack Z
Burns; 2017 Aug; 43(5):993-1001. PubMed ID: 28238405
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Reliability of scar assessments performed with an integrated skin testing device - the DermaLab Combo(®).
Gankande TU; Duke JM; Danielsen PL; DeJong HM; Wood FM; Wallace HJ
Burns; 2014 Dec; 40(8):1521-9. PubMed ID: 24630817
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Psychometric properties of the Brisbane Burn Scar Impact Profile in adults with burn scars.
Tyack Z; Kimble R; McPhail S; Plaza A; Simons M
PLoS One; 2017; 12(9):e0184452. PubMed ID: 28902874
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The Brisbane Burn Scar Impact Profile (child and young person version) for measuring health-related quality of life in children with burn scars: A longitudinal cohort study of reliability, validity and responsiveness.
Simons M; Kimble R; McPhail S; Tyack Z
Burns; 2019 Nov; 45(7):1537-1552. PubMed ID: 31387803
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Reliable scar scoring system to assess photographs of burn patients.
Mecott GA; Finnerty CC; Herndon DN; Al-Mousawi AM; Branski LK; Hegde S; Kraft R; Williams FN; Maldonado SA; Rivero HG; Rodriguez-Escobar N; Jeschke MG
J Surg Res; 2015 Dec; 199(2):688-97. PubMed ID: 26092214
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. In a clinimetric analysis, 3D stereophotogrammetry was found to be reliable and valid for measuring scar volume in clinical research.
Stekelenburg CM; Jaspers ME; Niessen FB; Knol DL; van der Wal MB; de Vet HC; van Zuijlen PP
J Clin Epidemiol; 2015 Jul; 68(7):782-7. PubMed ID: 25817943
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The longitudinal validity, reproducibility and responsiveness of the Brisbane Burn Scar Impact Profile (caregiver report for young children version) for measuring health-related quality of life in children with burn scars.
Simons M; Kimble R; McPhail S; Tyack Z
Burns; 2019 Dec; 45(8):1792-1809. PubMed ID: 31147101
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Exploring reliability of scar rating scales using photographs of burns from children aged up to 15 years.
Simons M; Ziviani J; Thorley M; McNee J; Tyack Z
J Burn Care Res; 2013; 34(4):427-38. PubMed ID: 23271058
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 3D photography is as accurate as digital planimetry tracing in determining burn wound area.
Stockton KA; McMillan CM; Storey KJ; David MC; Kimble RM
Burns; 2015 Feb; 41(1):80-4. PubMed ID: 24877886
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Direct comparison of reproducibility and reliability in quantitative assessments of burn scar properties.
Baumann ME; DeBruler DM; Blackstone BN; Coffey RA; Boyce ST; Supp DM; Bailey JK; Powell HM
Burns; 2021 Mar; 47(2):466-478. PubMed ID: 32839037
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A modified Vancouver Scar Scale linked with TBSA (mVSS-TBSA): Inter-rater reliability of an innovative burn scar assessment method.
Gankande TU; Wood FM; Edgar DW; Duke JM; DeJong HM; Henderson AE; Wallace HJ
Burns; 2013 Sep; 39(6):1142-9. PubMed ID: 23433706
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Incorporation of 3D stereophotogrammetry as a reliable method for assessing scar volume in standard clinical practice.
Peake M; Pan K; Rotatori RM; Powell H; Fowler L; James L; Dale E
Burns; 2019 Nov; 45(7):1614-1620. PubMed ID: 31208769
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Transepidermal water loss measured with the Tewameter TM300 in burn scars.
Gardien KL; Baas DC; de Vet HC; Middelkoop E
Burns; 2016 Nov; 42(7):1455-1462. PubMed ID: 27233677
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The Scarbase Duo(®): Intra-rater and inter-rater reliability and validity of a compact dual scar assessment tool.
Fell M; Meirte J; Anthonissen M; Maertens K; Pleat J; Moortgat P
Burns; 2016 Mar; 42(2):336-44. PubMed ID: 26774602
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. The evaluation of a clinical scar scale for porcine burn scars.
Wang XQ; Kravchuk O; Liu PY; Kempf M; Boogaard CV; Lau P; Cuttle L; Mill J; Kimble RM
Burns; 2009 Jun; 35(4):538-46. PubMed ID: 19201543
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Reliability and clinical utility of the Pliance X for measuring pressure at the interface of pressure garments and burn scars in children.
Wiseman J; Simons M; Kimble R; Tyack Z
Burns; 2018 Nov; 44(7):1820-1828. PubMed ID: 30077488
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Reliability of Repeated Measurements on Post-Burn Scars with Corneometer CM 825(®).
Anthonissen M; Daly D; Peeters R; Van Brussel M; Fieuws S; Moortgat P; Flour M; Van den Kerckhove E
Skin Res Technol; 2015 Aug; 21(3):302-12. PubMed ID: 25382262
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Reliability and Photographic Equivalency of the Scar Cosmesis Assessment and Rating (SCAR) Scale, an Outcome Measure for Postoperative Scars.
Kantor J
JAMA Dermatol; 2017 Jan; 153(1):55-60. PubMed ID: 27806156
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Reliability testing of a new scar assessment tool, Matching Assessment of Scars and Photographs (MAPS).
Masters M; McMahon M; Svens B
J Burn Care Rehabil; 2005; 26(3):273-84. PubMed ID: 15879752
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
